In one embodiment, a processor includes a microcode storage including processor instructions to create and execute a hidden resource manager (HRM) to execute in a hidden environment that is not visible to system software. The processor may further include an extend register to store security information including a measurement of at least one kernel code module of the hidden environment and a status of a verification of the at least one kernel code module. Other embodiments are described and claimed.
|
1. An article comprising a machine-accessible storage medium including instructions that when executed cause a system to:
receive an attestation request and a nonce from a verifier to attest to a hidden environment of the system executed using a hidden resource manager (HRM) implemented in microcode of a processor, wherein the hidden environment is not visible to system software;
generate a signed attestation record responsive to the attestation request directly in the processor via the microcode and without communication with an agent coupled to the processor via an interconnect; and
provide the signed attestation record to the verifier.
7. A method comprising:
generating a cipher message authentication code (CMAC) of a plurality of pages of a hidden partition of a system memory of a system using a first private key and storing each of the CMACs in a corresponding entry of an integrity check value (ICV) array;
encrypting the first private key and a value of a counter into an encrypted blob using a second private key;
transitioning the system from a first power state to a low power state in which the system memory is unprotected by a processor of the system; and
using the encrypted blob and the ICV array to validate the hidden partition when the system is transitioned from the low power state to the first power state.
15. A system comprising:
a processor to execute instructions, the processor including at least one core and a microcode storage including processor instructions to create and execute a hidden resource manager (HRM) to execute in a hidden environment that is not visible to system software, wherein the HRM is to receive an attestation request and a nonce from a verifier to attest to the hidden environment, generate a signed attestation record responsive to the attestation request in the processor without communication with an agent coupled to the processor via an interconnect, and provide the signed attestation record to the verifier; and
a system memory coupled to the processor and including a hidden memory partition.
2. The article of
3. The article of
4. The article of
5. The article of
6. The article of
launch the hidden environment via execution of the microcode;
verify a first kernel based on a first manifest for the first kernel using the microcode and if the first kernel is verified, update an extend register of the processor with a measurement of the first kernel; and
verify a second kernel based on a second manifest for the second kernel using the microcode and if the second kernel is verified, update the extend register with a measurement of the second kernel.
8. The method of
9. The method of
10. The method of
11. The method of
12. The method of
decrypting the encrypted blob using the second private key, wherein the second private key is generated by microcode of the processor, to obtain the first private key and the counter value;
comparing the counter value to the incremented counter value stored in the non-volatile storage; and
verifying the CMAC of the ICV array and the CMAC of the pages.
13. The method of
14. The method of
16. The system of
17. The system of
18. The system of
19. The system of
20. The system of
|
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/639,616, filed Dec. 16, 2009, the content of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
Computer systems are formed with a collection of hardware elements including one or more processors, memory, input/output devices and so forth. In addition, different types of software may be present in a system, including system software such as an operating system (OS), a virtual machine monitor (VMM) or so forth. In addition, application software can be provided to perform specific tasks desired by a user such as word processing, email, games and so forth. To enable communication between software and underlying processor hardware, instructions of the software can be converted into smaller instructions such as micro-instructions (uops) that can be implemented using microcode stored in the processor.
In general, a full range of memory is visible to system software such as an OS or VMM. However, to provide for secure operations and so forth, a hidden partition may be provided in memory that includes code that can run using a resource manager, which can be implemented in processor microcode and which can be hidden from the OS/VMM. However, various security and attestation issues arise in providing such hidden resources, raising complexity.
As one example, when a system is placed in certain low power states, such as a so-called suspended (S3) state in accordance with the Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI), Rev. 2.0 Standard, Apr. 25, 2003, the system memory is in self-refresh state. However, the processor is powered off and thus there are no protections active on the memory. Hence an adversary may be able to modify the contents of memory when the system is in the S3 state and if the memory is not verified on resume (S0 state), this may lead to code injection attacks on a hidden memory partition of the system memory. While hashing the memory prior to entering S3 and verifying the contents on resuming from S3 into S0 may avoid such code injection attacks, this has drawbacks, including extending the amount of time needed to transition between S0 and S3 due to the additional work to be done to hash and later verify the memory contents.
Embodiments may provide for efficient verification of the integrity of a hidden memory partition, which can be used when exiting from a low power state into a normal operation state. Still further, embodiments may be used to provide attestation of a hidden environment such that various software to be executed in the environment can be verified prior to execution. Such attestation may be implemented completely within a processor and without the need for accessing other components via an interconnect, increasing the speed and reducing the complexity and potential for security threats via interaction with the interconnect and other components.
In order to provide memory separation between a host operating system (OS)/virtual machine monitor (VMM) and a hidden partition, a processor may make use of one or more hardware range registers that effectively block host OS/VMM-generated accesses to the hidden memory. Likewise, in order to control accesses from the hidden partition to the host OS/VMM memory, a page table may be present under the hidden partition. To better understand operation in a hidden environment, it is instructive to provide an overview of a platform that provides for such an environment.
Referring now to
Additional hardware of platform 10 may include a peripheral controller hub (PCH) 40 that may include a virtualization engine 42 (VE) and a manageability engine (ME) 44 which may provide control functions for various peripheral devices such as a storage 50, e.g., a mass storage such as a disk drive, optical or other non-volatile storage. In addition, a network interface controller (NIC) 55 may enable communication between platform 10 and other agents of a network such as a wired network, e.g., a local area network (LAN), a wireless network such as a wireless LAN (WLAN), or a wide-range wireless network such as a cellular network. While shown with this particular hardware in the embodiment of
As further seen in
The resource manager may execute to provide services to code of hidden partition 70. As seen, various code may be present in this hidden partition, which may be stored in a partition of, e.g., system memory 30 that is segmented and hidden from other system software, i.e., the OS and VMM. Hidden partition 70 includes various code, including one or more hidden kernels and drivers 72, which may provide kernel services as well as drivers for interfacing with various devices of the platform. Additional core capabilities code 74 may be present, in addition to one or more applications 75 that may execute in the hidden execution environment. Although the scope of the present invention is not limited in this regard, the hidden execution environment may be for operations such as implemented to follow a formal security model that provide higher integrity than a general-purpose OS. In addition, platform includes conventional software including a host OS/VMM partition 60, which may include various host device drivers 62 and host applications 64. Such code may be stored in another partition of system memory 30. HRM 25 may provide an abstraction of the system hardware to the OS/VMM partition.
Embodiments may provide mechanisms that may be implemented by processor microcode that executes in the hidden environment to reduce the amount of time that needs to be spent in performing S3 to S0 and S0 to S3 transitions. Transitioning a system into S3 causes the processor to be powered off and the memory to be placed into a self-refresh mode. At this time there are no protections on the memory, and various runtime protections are not operational. As such, the memory, including the hidden memory, may be vulnerable to different security threats. Note that states S1 and S2 apply to processor components (e.g., core and uncore only) and do not involve system memory. Additional low power states S4 and S5 cut power to system memory so all contents are lost.
While the following list is not exhaustive, it is to be understood that threats can take many different forms. For example, one such threat may be malicious code injection in which an attacker can modify/replace a memory image during S3 power state transitions. Other threats exploit hash algorithms, in which an attacker can exploit weaknesses in cryptographic hash algorithms to find an attack memory page that has the hash signature of a valid page, and then the attack page is injected into memory. A break once run everywhere (BORE) attack is one in which an attacker that has obtained an attack page can inject the attack page on a large number of similarly configured systems. A replay attack may occur where an attacker archives all the memory pages and integrity check values and then replaces the current memory pages and integrity values. A page swap attack occurs when an attacker may swap pages that have the same cipher message authentication code (CMAC) values.
Certain threats can be addressed by having the HRM measure (e.g., hash and verify) the memory image in self-refresh before allowing it to execute. In one embodiment, the approach does a page-by-page integrity check whose values are recorded in an integrity check value (ICV) array. The hash is performed by the HRM microcode. In one embodiment, each entry of the ICV array contains the following information: an integrity check value, which may be a secure hash algorithm (SHA) hash of the page or an Advanced Encryption Standard-Cipher-based Message Authentication Code (AES-CMAC) operation in accordance with the Network Working Group Request for Comments (RFC) 4493, June 2006; an ICV valid indicator, which may be true/false to indicate whether the page has been modified since the last ICV calculation was performed; and a direct memory access (DMA) page indicator, which can be true/false to indicate whether the page can be accessed by devices using DMA.
In one embodiment, the HRM can use a background task to periodically hash the hidden pages. Prior to each transition to the hidden environment, the background task can be invoked to hash a fixed set of pages in memory. For example, if the hidden image is 64 MB in size, there are 16384 pages to integrity protect. The background task may run through the 16K pages in a round robin manner and perform the hash of 16 pages in each run. Thus the background task will need to be invoked 1K times to perform the hash of all 16K pages allocated to a hidden execution environment (HEE). The time taken to hash the pages is attributed to the HEE and is subtracted from execution credit.
The ICV calculation can be according to different hash algorithms. For example instead of a SHA1 hash, a stronger hash algorithm such as a SHA2 operation can be used to address hash algorithm exploits. However, there can be a performance penalty and memory overhead cost associated with use of SHA2 algorithms. SHA256 requires approximately 20 cycles/byte and SHA512 about 12 cycles/byte. SHA2 algorithms also produce a message digest that is typically quite large. SHA256 has a 256-bit (32 bytes) message digest (MD) and SHA512 has a 64 byte MD. This overhead is multiplied by the number of pages in memory (16-64 MB) which is a considerable added overhead.
Thus in many embodiments an alternative to SHA2 such as an AES-CMAC operation may be used, which is much faster than a SHA algorithm. Also, a CMAC may be used instead of a SHA2 function as it has second pre-image resistance
Referring now to
On a S0 to S3 transition, the HRM may generate ICV values for the hidden memory pages. Thus on a S0 to S3 transition the HRM constructs the ICV array dynamically by computing CMAC values for each memory page, along with the indicators described above, in one embodiment. The ICV array can be stored in an unused memory page. Thereafter, the hidden memory may be protected using integrity calculations and protection in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.
Referring now to
To perform an integrity calculation, each memory page may be provided to an AES-CMAC function 150, which in one embodiment may be implemented using an accelerator or other specialized hardware present in a processor core, uncore, integrated input/output controller, peripheral controller, memory controller, or security co-processor. By using a private key K1 that is unique to every platform as part of a CMAC computation, a CMAC value from another platform cannot be used to attack the target platform since the attacker cannot guess K1 easily for each platform.
In one embodiment, this key may be 128 bits and may be unique to each platform. In one embodiment, the AES-CMAC computation may use an AES accelerator contained in a core that can perform user-level ISA instructions to implement an AES algorithm. With the AES accelerator the AES-CMAC can function at about 3.5 cycles/byte in one embodiment, providing an efficient and secure method for page integrity protection. The resulting CMAC value for each page may be stored in an ICV array 120. In one embodiment, the memory overhead per page is 64-bits per CMAC. The high-order bits are selected from a 128-bit CMAC resulting from the 128-bit K1 value. In addition, an integrity calculation on the overall ICV array 120 may similarly be performed using the same key K1 using function 160, which thus stores an array CMAC value (CMACA) in a storage 165. In one embodiment, this CMACA value may be 64 bits.
To identify an instantiation for which these integrity values were calculated, an AES-cipher block chaining (CBC) encryption function 170 in accordance with the Network Working Group Request for Comments 3602 (September 2003) may operate to generate an encrypted blob 190 using a second private key K2, stored in a storage 175, that operates to perform an encryption on the key value K1 and a value of a counter C1, stored in a counter 180. In one embodiment, K2 is derived from a HRM storage key (a symmetric key known only to the HRM). In turn, the HRM storage key can be obtained from a set of fuses in the processor or in a chipset. In various embodiments, the counter may be a monotonic counter.
In different implementations, the monotonic counter resource can be implemented using several techniques. As examples, the counter can be realized by accessing a TPM or ME. In this example, the HRM may take ownership of the TPM to ensure access to counter resources or the HRM may access a persistent register, e.g., present in the processor. As another example, the HRM may access a hidden storage area (e.g., a flash or other non-volatile memory) by establishing a trusted relationship (e.g., performing a key exchange) with a ME. As yet another example, the HRM may access a storage device such as hard disk drive or a solid state drive (HDD/SSD), e.g., by establishing a trusted relationship (e.g., performing key exchange) with the storage device.
The resulting blob 190 may be stored and then later accessed to determine whether the hidden partition's memory remains intact after a transition back to an operating state. C1 is incremented to a resume counter value C2 following its inclusion in the blob. Thereafter, C2 may be written to a persistent memory, e.g., using a read-increment-write atomic operation, to ensure a replay attack can be detected. In other embodiments, the increment may occur after the resume from the S3 state.
Note that in some embodiments, a page swap attack can be addressed by including a page index value taken from page metadata in the CMAC. Page index values are determined by the HRM which relies on hardware protections to thwart attackers. Program bugs in the HRM could result in duplicate page index values being included on more than one page CMAC. An alternative technique may use a second monotonic counter as a more reliable unique identifier.
Referring now to
Referring still to
Referring now to
If the integrity of the ICV array is not compromised, the HRM marks all HEE pages as not present in hidden page tables (block 330) and transfers control to a hidden boot loader entry point (block 335). As the boot loader starts executing, the code and data page accesses (block 340) generate page table faults into the HRM (diamond 345). If there is a valid ICV for the page in the ICV array (diamond 350), the HRM computes the ICV on the faulting page and matches it against the ICV in the ICV array to verify the integrity of the page (block 355). If verified (diamond 370), the page is then mapped into the hidden page table as a read-only page (to track changes to the page) (block 375). Thereafter, access to the page may be allowed (block 380).
Still referring to
Referring now to
At diamond 450 the HRM may determine whether the C 1 value differs from the C2 value by more than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 1). If so, verification fails and a security breach may be reported (block 460). If the comparison is as expected, control passes to block 470, where the CMAC value for the ICV array and the CMAC values for each of the hidden execution environment pages may be verified (block 470). If the computed values match the stored values, verification may be successful as determined at diamond 475 and a report of successful verification may be made (block 480). Otherwise, verification fails and control passes to block 460.
By performing hashing of memory pages based on AES-CMAC and an AES-CMAC of the array of CMAC values (CMACA), embodiments may realize a more efficient technique for preventing second pre-image attacks. Additionally, use of a monotonic counter value included with encryption of the CMACA value can prevent an attacker from replacing all memory pages with pages from a previous power state transition. Also, by including a page index value in the page CMAC calculation, malicious replacement of identical pages occurring at different address locations that have the same CMAC value can be prevented.
Embodiments may further enable a hidden manageability environment instantiated using microcode of a microprocessor to attest to that environment to external entities, while being sensitive to a user's privacy goals. In addition, integrity measurements of the environment can be recorded by microcode so that they can be later used and verified by a remote or external entity.
To realize such attestation activity, microcode can create a root-of-trust in which the functions of attestation are protected from external threats. An extend register of the processor may be used to store integrity measurements. Then a private key (e.g., a so-called EPID) can be used to digitally sign the contents of the extend register. In turn, a corresponding public key can cryptographically verify the signature of the EPID private key. In some embodiments, an OwnerID value can also be provided by the entity responsible for determining the platform's privacy and security policy.
An asymmetric code signing key may be used to verify the integrity of firmware that is loaded into the hidden environment at execution/startup. In turn, an integrity manifest may contain a white list of acceptable integrity measurements. This manifest may protect a launch control policy that indicates all applications that may be launched into the hidden environment.
In general, two phases of operation to boot into a secure hidden environment may occur: 1) a launch phase; and 2) an attestation phase. In the launch phase firmware is loaded into memory pages that are hidden from main memory by the HRM. The integrity manifest is first verified using an asymmetric code signing key. The module to be loaded is then verified using a white list (e.g., hash values) contained in the manifest.
Code measurements are recorded in the extend register that is accessible only by the HRM so that its value cannot be updated or reset by untrusted code. As will be described below, in one embodiment the first object to be verified is a transient kernel of the hidden environment, referred to as Kernel-0, a boot loader, which is used to launch a persistent kernel (Kernel-1) of the hidden environment. Kernel-0 receives the code signing key from the HRM and performs code integrity measurements and verifications for Kernel-1. Measurements are given to the HRM to be stored in the extend register. Then Kernel-1 verifies application code integrity using the launch control policy supplied by Kernel-0. Integrity measurements of the application(s) may be recorded in a log file called a launch history. Details of the attestation phase are described further below.
Referring now to
As seen, when verification indicates a valid transient kernel, the transient kernel may be launched (block 550) and executed to verify a hidden kernel (block 560). This hidden kernel may be a persistent kernel for the hidden execution environment. Accordingly, at diamond 565 it may be determined whether the hidden kernel is verified. If so, a measurement of the hidden kernel may be stored in the extend register (block 575), and one or more applications to be executed may be verified using the hidden kernel (block 580). Otherwise, if the hidden kernel is not verified, control passes to block 570, where a failure may be reported. While shown with this particular in the embodiment of
Launch of an application depends on successful launch of each preceding layer down to the HRM, details of which are shown in
When the HRM loads the Kernel-0 code, it computes a hash (e.g., an AES-CMAC hash) of Kernel-0 code that is compared to the hash value in the manifest. The manifest signature is verified using the HPK code-signing key. If Kernel-0 image integrity is verified, an extend register 515′, which may be within a processor, may be updated with the hash value and a flag indicating successful verification (e.g., K0_SUCCESS_BIT=TRUE). Otherwise, the register is updated to indicate failed verification (e.g., K0_SUCCESS_BIT=FALSE).
The Kernel-0 layer 520′ may be initiated when the HRM launches Kernel-0 and passes the HPK public key to Kernel-0 only if the flag bit is set (e.g., K0_SUCCESS_BIT=TRUE). Otherwise, the HRM disallows Kernel-0 or Kernel-1 use of the extend register. In one embodiment, Kernel-0 is a transient kernel whose purpose is to launch Kernel-1. Kernel-0 loads a Kernel-1 manifest that includes the Kernel-1 code, a hash of the code, an application launch control policy (AppLCP) that contains a whitelist of acceptable-to-run applications on Kernel-1, and a signature of the HPK. The AppLCP is hashed and extended into extend register 515′. The AppLCP format may include version information that is included in the hash that is extended in the extend register. When Kernel-0 loads the Kernel-1 code, it computes a hash (e.g., AES-CMAC hash) of the Kernel-1 code that is compared to the hash value in the Kernel-1 manifest. The manifest signature is verified using the HPK code-signing key. In one embodiment, all of the Kernel-1 core services and shared libraries are included in the Kernel-1 integrity measurement.
If Kernel-1 image integrity is verified, extend register 515′ is updated with the hash value and a flag indicating successful verification (e.g., K1_SUCCESS_BIT=TRUE). Otherwise, it is updated with the flag set to indicate failed verification (i.e., K1_SUCCESS_BIT=FALSE). Kernel-1 computes the AppLCP integrity hash. The hash is given to extend register 515′ for update. At this time, the Kernel-1 layer 530′ is launched. The AppLCP is passed to Kernel-1 as part of the launch. Kernel-1 loads applications securely by computing an integrity hash for each application to be launched. A policy, separate from the AppLCP, determines which applications are to be loaded. The application integrity check is successful if the Kernel-1 computed hash (AES-CMAC) matches the hash value contained in the AppLCP. A history of application launch results may be recorded in a launch history 535′. At this time the hidden environment is ready for execution.
In the attestation phase, a verifier may initiate a request to obtain proof of environment integrity. The verifier supplies a nonce (e.g., Nonce-1) to Kernel-1, which ensures the attestation result is fresh (i.e., is not replayed from a previous request). Kernel-1 may then construct a hash of the launch history that is passed to the HRM with Nonce-1 for processing.
The HRM incorporates the launch history hash, nonce, extend register and an OwnerID (described below) into a message that is then digitally signed by the private key. The signed attestation record is returned to Kernel-1, and is then forwarded to the original verifier. The verifier checks the EPID signature using a public copy of the private key that it received previously. The verifier applies a policy that interprets the attestation record designed to gauge risk associated with interactions with the hidden environment.
Thus in various embodiments, attestation may be provided entirely in the processor without the need for discrete attestation controllers separate from microprocessor cores. This avoids the need to trust bus architectures and interconnects joining a core with an attestation controller. Still further, embodiments can combine attestation with a hidden environment as the on-chip processor resource can instantiate a hidden manageability environment.
That is, attestation is integrated with the hidden environment in microcode which runs on the processor core(s). Microcode has a root-of-trust similar to processor microcode, it can be trusted to manage EPID, extend register and a code signing key properly. Signing the attestation received using EPID allows the verifier to know that the attestation record is believable because it was constructed by a given manufacturer's provided hardware. In one embodiment, in which a user-generated private key (e.g., an OwnerID) is used, inclusion of the OwnerID in the attestation record allows the owner of the platform to control privacy attributes by determining how unique or non-unique the Owner ID should be.
Attestation of the HEE environment begins with a verifier's attestation request message. A verifier is any environment that has the ability to interact with Kernel-1. Referring now to
Kernel-1 queries the launch history 625 to obtain integrity value and launch state for a given application (e.g., App-X). This information is then forwarded to a HRM 630, along with Noncel. The HRM constructs an attestation record including the information passed in by Kernel-1 and a private key, such as an OwnerID supplied as part of a hidden deployment into the customer's environment. As seen, the OwnerID 635 may be stored in a non-volatile storage associated with the HRM, either internal or external to the processor. When the platform is first loaded into an environment it is possible for the OwnerID to be formed which allows the owner of the platform to establish their own identity for the hardware as opposed to an identity defined by the manufacturer. As such, the owner of the hardware can determine how to name the platform and decide how much or how little uniqueness is desired. Thus based on privacy policies for an organization, this OwnerID may disclose a determined amount of personally identifiable information. The OwnerID is encrypted using the HRM wrapping key (HWK) which is derived from fuses, e.g., in the uncore. The wrapped OwnerID can then be stored in a non-volatile storage along with Kernel-0, Kernel-1, applications, manifests and application data. Information from an extend register 638, which may be a machine specific register (MSR) contained, e.g., in the uncore, including integrity measurements of Kernel-1 and Kernel-0 as well as a hash of the AppLCP is provided with the attestation record, which is signed using the EPID private key.
The signed result is forwarded to verifier 610, where the EPID signature is verified using the EPID public key. The attestation record Noncel is compared to the original to detect replay attacks. The customer-supplied OwnerID is checked to determine if this is a platform owned by the verifier. A published whitelist of applications, Kernel-1, and Kernel-0 images can be consulted to verify that App-X is executing in the intended environment. As one example, the OwnerID(s) assigned to platforms that are deployed into a customer's environment cache archived in a directory service where they can be queried by verification agents that are generally deployed within a network or enterprise. The verifier also may access a whitelist of owner approved kernels, applications and configurations, also archived in the directory service.
Referring now to
As shown in
Referring still to
Various resources may be present in execution units 720, including, for example, various integer, floating point, and single instruction multiple data (SIMD) logic units, among other specialized hardware, such as an encryption accelerator. Results may be provided to retirement logic, namely a reorder buffer (ROB) 740. More specifically, ROB 740 may include various arrays and logic to receive information associated with instructions that are executed. This information is then examined by ROB 740 to determine whether the instructions can be validly retired and result data committed to the architectural state of the processor, or whether one or more exceptions occurred that prevent a proper retirement of the instructions. Of course, ROB 740 may handle other operations associated with retirement.
As shown in
Embodiments may be implemented in code and may be stored on a storage medium having stored thereon instructions which can be used to program a system to perform the instructions. The storage medium may include, but is not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, optical disks, solid state drives (SSDs), compact disk read-only memories (CD-ROMs), compact disk rewritables (CD-RWs), and magneto-optical disks, semiconductor devices such as read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs) such as dynamic random access memories (DRAMs), static random access memories (SRAMs), erasable programmable read-only memories (EPROMs), flash memories, electrically erasable programmable read-only memories (EEPROMs), magnetic or optical cards, or any other type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions.
While the present invention has been described with respect to a limited number of embodiments, those skilled in the art will appreciate numerous modifications and variations therefrom. It is intended that the appended claims cover all such modifications and variations as fall within the true spirit and scope of this present invention.
Smith, Ned M., Shanbhogue, Vedvyas, Kumar, Arvind, Goel, Purushottam
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
6990579, | Mar 31 2000 | Intel Corporation | Platform and method for remote attestation of a platform |
7458002, | Aug 19 2003 | Infineon Technologies AG | Processor having electronic fuses for storing secret data |
20040003273, | |||
20040165725, | |||
20050066191, | |||
20060015749, | |||
20080077993, | |||
20080184028, | |||
20080244292, | |||
20090132837, | |||
20090172438, | |||
20090290712, | |||
CN101515316, | |||
CN101533447, | |||
CN1662869, |
Executed on | Assignor | Assignee | Conveyance | Frame | Reel | Doc |
Mar 01 2013 | Intel Corporation | (assignment on the face of the patent) | / |
Date | Maintenance Fee Events |
Sep 29 2014 | ASPN: Payor Number Assigned. |
Jun 25 2018 | REM: Maintenance Fee Reminder Mailed. |
Dec 17 2018 | EXP: Patent Expired for Failure to Pay Maintenance Fees. |
Date | Maintenance Schedule |
Nov 11 2017 | 4 years fee payment window open |
May 11 2018 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Nov 11 2018 | patent expiry (for year 4) |
Nov 11 2020 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) |
Nov 11 2021 | 8 years fee payment window open |
May 11 2022 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Nov 11 2022 | patent expiry (for year 8) |
Nov 11 2024 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) |
Nov 11 2025 | 12 years fee payment window open |
May 11 2026 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Nov 11 2026 | patent expiry (for year 12) |
Nov 11 2028 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |